SyncroMSP MCP Server

estimates_delete_line_item

Delete a line item from an estimate by specifying estimate and line item IDs, with mandatory user confirmation.

Instructions

Delete a line item from an estimate. The user MUST confirm.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "line_item_id": "<line_item_id>",
      "confirmed": "<confirmed>"
    },
    "name": "estimates_delete_line_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Estimate ID
`confirmed`	Yes	Must be true
`line_item_id`	Yes	Line item ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Given the absence of annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It notes the confirmation requirement, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose whether deletion is irreversible, what happens to associated data, or any side effects. The description adds modest value beyond the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences, no fluff. The critical action and constraint are front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is minimal and lacks context about error scenarios, return values, or usage boundaries. Given the complexity of deletion, the description fails to provide sufficient completeness for an agent to use it without further guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions. The description reinforces the 'confirmed' parameter's purpose ('Must be true'), but adds little beyond what the schema already states. The baseline is 3 due to full schema coverage, and the description does not elevate beyond that.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb (Delete), resource (a line item from an estimate), and adds a critical constraint (user MUST confirm). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like estimates_add_line_item and estimates_update_line_item.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description fails to provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, consequences, or when not to use it. The only guideline is the confirmation requirement, which is more of a parameter constraint.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server